Article CC BY 4.0
refereed
published

NAM-supported read-across : From case studies to regulatory guidance in safety assessment

Affiliation
Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing, CAAT-Europe, University of Konstanz, Germany
Rovida, Costanza;
Affiliation
Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine (ITEM), Hannover, Germany
Escher, Sylvia E.;
Affiliation
German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Germany
Herzler, Matthias;
Affiliation
Danish Technical University, FOOD, Lyngby, Denmark
Bennekou, Susanne H.;
Affiliation
Experimental Toxicology and Ecology, BASF SE, Ludwigshafen, Germany
Kamp, Hennicke;
Affiliation
Department of Risk Analysis of Products in Development, TNO, Netherlands
Kroese, Dinant E.;
Affiliation
Centre for Safety of Substances and Products, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, Netherlands
Maslankiewicz, Lidka;
Affiliation
Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands
Moné, Martijn J.;
Affiliation
Center for Computational Toxicology & Exposure (CCTE), US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, United States
Patlewicz, Grace;
Affiliation
Division of the National Toxicology Program (DNTP), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), Research Triangle Park, United States
Sipes, Nisha;
Affiliation
Medicines Evaluation Board (CBG-MEB), Netherlands
Van Aerts, Leon;
Affiliation
Sharnbrook, United Kingdom
White, Andrew;
Affiliation
National Institute of Health Sciences, Kawasaki, Japan
Yamada, Takashi;
Affiliation
Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands
Van de Water, Bob

The use of new approach methodologies (NAMs) in support of read-across (RAx) approaches for regulatory purposes is a main goal of the EU-ToxRisk project. To bring this forward, EU-ToxRisk partners convened a workshop in close collaboration with regulatory representatives from key organizations including European regulatory agencies, such as the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), as well as the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS), national agencies from several European countries, Japan, Canada and the USA, as well as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). More than a hundred people actively participated in the discussions, bringing together diverse viewpoints across academia, regulators and industry. The discussion was organized starting from five practical cases of RAx applied to specific problems that offered the oppor-tunity to consider real examples. There was general consensus that NAMs can improve confidence in RAx, in particular in defining category boundaries as well as characterizing the similarities/dissimilarities between source and target substances. In addition to describing dynamics, NAMs can be helpful in terms of kinetics and metabolism that may play an important role in the demonstration of similarity or dissimilarity among the members of a category. NAMs were also noted as effective in providing quanti-tative data correlated with traditional no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) used in risk assessment, while reducing the uncertainty on the final conclusion. An interesting point of view was the advice on calibrating the number of new tests that should be carefully selected, avoiding the allure of "the more, the better". Unfortunately, yet unsurprisingly, there was no single approach befitting every case, requiring careful analysis delineating the optimal approach. Expert analysis and assessment of each specific case is still an important step in the process.

Cite

Citation style:
Could not load citation form.

Access Statistic

Total:
Downloads:
Abtractviews:
Last 12 Month:
Downloads:
Abtractviews:

Rights

Use and reproduction: